Yes, that's the purpose of the amendment. The fact is that if that's happening, it would suggest that a car is being provided as a consequence of employment.
The amendment is being made so that there isn't the ability for taxpayers to put in place some sort of arrangement that has another entity provide the car and then try to take the position that.... It removes the need for the CRA to assess the relationship between those companies and allows it to look at the situation as a whole to see if the car is being provided as a consequence of the employee's employment.
Like I said earlier, that's consistent with other rules that look at employee benefits.